Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40960574›Full record

ArticleCardiovascular engineering and technology2025

Assessing the Impact of Downsampled ECGs and Alternative Loss Functions in Multi-Label Classification of 12-Lead ECGs.

Bjørn-Jostein Singstad, Eraraya Morenzo Muten

Abstract readValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Cardiovascular engineering and technology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Bjørn-Jostein SingstadMedical Technology and E-health, Akershus University Hospital, Lørenskog, Norway. b.j.singstad@fys.uio.no.ORCID 0000-0003-4055-4297
Eraraya Morenzo MutenDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Bandung, Indonesia.

Funding

Nasjonalforeningen for Folkehelsen #29038
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe electrocardiogram (ECG) is an almost universally accessible diagnostic tool for heart disease. An ECG is measured by using an electrocardiograph, and today's electrocardiographs use built-in software to interpret the ECGs automatically after they are recorded. However, these algorithms exhibit limited performance, and therefore, clinicians usually have to manually interpret the ECG, regardless of whether an algorithm has interpreted it or not. Manual interpretation of the ECG can be time-consuming and requires specific skills. Therefore, better algorithms are clearly needed to make correct ECG interpretations more accessible and time-efficient. Algorithms based on artificial intelligence (AI) have demonstrated promising performance in various fields, including ECG interpretation, over the past few years and may represent an alternative to manual ECG interpretation by doctors.

resultsWe trained and validated a convolutional neural network with an Inception architecture on a dataset with 88253 12-lead ECGs, and classified 30 of the most frequent annotated cardiac conditions in the dataset. We assessed two different loss functions and different ECG sampling rates and the best-performing model used double soft F1-loss and ECGs downsampled to 75Hz. This model achieved an F1-score of

conclusionsOne of the more significant contributions that emerge from this study is the use of aggregated saliency maps to obtain global ECG lead importance for different cardiac conditions. In addition, we emphasized the relevance of evaluating different loss functions, and in this specific case, we found double soft F1-loss to be slightly better than binary cross-entropy (BCE). Finally, we found it somewhat surprising that drastic downsampling of the ECG led to higher performance than higher sampling frequencies, such as 500Hz. These findings contribute in several ways to our understanding of the artificial intelligence-based interpretation of ECGs, but further studies should be carried out to validate these findings in other datasets from other patient cohorts.

Indexed as

Action PotentialsDeep LearningDiagnosis, Computer-AssistedElectrocardiographyHeart DiseasesHeart RateNeural Networks, ComputerSignal Processing, Computer-AssistedAlgorithmsDatabases, FactualHumansPredictive Value of TestsReproducibility of ResultsConvolutional neural networkDouble soft F1-lossECGExplainable AIMulti-label classification

Identifiers

PMID40960574
PMCPMC12528228

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.